Fetoscopic transesophageal electrocardiography and stimulation in fetal sheep: a minimally invasive approach aimed at diagnosis and termination of therapy-refractory supraventricular tachycardias in human fetuses.

BACKGROUND: Therapy-refractory supraventricular tachycardia commonly results in hydrops and death in human fetuses. The purpose of this study in fetal sheep was to assess the feasibility of a minimally invasive fetoscopic approach for fetal transesophageal electrocardiography and stimulation aimed at diagnosis and termination of these tachycardias. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied a total of 10 fetal sheep (87 to 103 days of gestation; term=145 days). We entered the amniotic cavity using a percutaneous fetoscopic approach and placed various electrophysiology catheters into the fetal esophagus. We recorded the number of animals in which fetoscopic transesophageal electrocardiography and stimulation were successful and assessed pacing success and thresholds for different catheters. In addition, we monitored for potential adverse effects from stimulation and for other complications of the operation. Recording of transesophageal electrocardiograms was successful in all fetal sheep. Capture during stimulation was successfully documented by additional fetal bipolar surface electrocardiograms in 7 fetuses. In fetuses in which fetal surface electrocardiograms were not recorded, pacing stimulus artifacts interfered with documentation of capture. Although stimulation thresholds were high, the maternal rhythm was not affected by fetal stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Fetoscopic fetal transesophageal electrocardiography and stimulation are feasible in fetal sheep. This minimally invasive approach might have the potential to improve diagnosis and management of therapy-refractory supraventricular tachycardias in human fetuses.

The vulnerable period for low and high energy T-wave shocks: role of dispersion of repolarisation and effect of d-sotalol.

INTRODUCTION: The induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) by T-wave shocks has been related to dispersion of repolarisation, but only indirect evidence of this hypothesis exists. The effects of drugs prolonging repolarisation like d-sotalol on the vulnerability to T-wave shocks remain unknown. METHODS: In 9 isolated rabbit heart, 7 monophasic action potentials (MAPs) and an ECG were recorded simultaneously. Vulnerable periods were determined using two different shock strengths, one close to the fibrillation threshold and the other close to the upper limit of vulnerability, at baseline and after action potential prolongation by d-sotalol. RESULTS: The vulnerable period had a duration of 30 +/- 14 ms for the lower and 34 +/- 12 ms for the higher shock strength (P = NS). Coupling intervals of the vulnerable periods were 13 +/- 10 ms shorter for higher shock strengths as compared to lower shock strengths (P < 0.005). The vulnerable period for low shock strengths coincided with dispersion of MAPs at 90% repolarisation (r = 0.87-0.92, P < 0.005), and the vulnerable period for high shock strengths coincided with dispersion at 70% repolarisation (r = 0.82-0.93, P < 0.005). ECG parameters predicted the vulnerable periods less precisely than MAP repolarisation (r < or = 0.72). d-Sotalol prolonged MAP durations by an average of 33 ms at 70% and 39 ms at 90% repolarisation but did not alter the described relations, nor did it reduce dispersion of repolarisation or duration of the vulnerable periods. CONCLUSIONS: Dispersion of repolarisation determines vulnerable periods and might be part of the arrhythmogenic substrate promoting induction of VF by T-wave shocks. The coupling intervals of the vulnerable periods depend on the applied shock strength as well as repolarisation, with shock strengths close to the fibrillation threshold inducing VF during dispersion at 90% repolarisation and shock strengths close to the upper limit of vulnerability inducing VF during dispersion at 70% repolarisation. d-Sotalol reduces neither vulnerability to T-wave shocks nor dispersion of repolarisation in this isolated heart model.

Phase angle convergence of multiple monophasic action potential recordings precedes spontaneous termination of ventricular fibrillation.

AIMS: To elucidate the mechanism of spontaneous termination of ventricular fibrillation (VF) and to define an indicator of its occurrence, the phase angle, a novel measure to assess synchrony of activation, was evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 7 isolated rabbit hearts, 7 monophasic action potentials were recorded simultaneously. Ventricular fibrillation was induced by T wave shocks. Cycle lengths (CL) and phase angles between all 7 recordings were analyzed until spontaneous termination or shock-induced defibrillation. Average phase angle was calculated as activation time difference to a reference channel and expressed as a fraction of the reference channel's CL with 1 equaling a complete CL. Initial CLs and phase angles were similar in sustained and terminating episodes (CL: 141 +/- 16 ms vs 142 +/- 24 ms, phase angle: 0.244 +/- 0.11 vs 0.263 +/- 0.1, p = NS). During spontaneous termination, CL increased slightly by 7%. Average phase angle converged gradually over the last three activations before termination of ventricular fibrillation by 22-48% (p < 0.0005), eventually resulting in phase angles similar to paced rhythms directly prior to spontaneous termination of ventricular fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Gradual synchronization of activation is part of the electrophysiological mechanism resulting in spontaneous ventricular fibrillation termination and can be detected three activations before termination. Phase angle convergence may be useful to detect spontaneous termination of ventricular fibrillation.

Postrepolarization refractoriness versus conduction slowing caused by class I antiarrhythmic drugs: antiarrhythmic and proarrhythmic effects.

BACKGROUND: Conduction block may be both antiarrhythmic and proarrhythmic. Drug-induced postrepolarization refractoriness (PRR) may prevent premature excitation and tachyarrhythmia induction. The effects of propafenone and procainamide on these parameters, and their antiarrhythmic or proarrhythmic consequences, were investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 11 isolated Langendorff-perfused rabbit hearts, monophasic action potentials (MAPs) were recorded simultaneously from six to seven different right and left ventricular sites, along with a volume-conducted ECG. All recordings were used to discern ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) induced by repetitive extrastimulation (S2-S5) or 10-second burst stimulation at 25 to 200 Hz at baseline and after addition of procainamide (20 micromol/L) or propafenone (1 micromol/L) to the perfusate. MAPs were analyzed for action potential duration at 90% repolarization (APD90), conduction times (CT) between the pacing site and the other MAPs, and PRR (effective refractory period-APD90=PRR) and related to the induction of VT or VF. During steady-state pacing, procainamide and propafenone prolonged APD90 by 12% and 14%, respectively. Procainamide slowed mean CT by 40% during S2-S5 pacing, whereas propafenone slowed mean CT by up to 400% (P<0.001 versus baseline and procainamide). Wavelength was not changed significantly by procainamide but was shortened fourfold by propafenone at S5. Both drugs produced PRR, which was associated with a 70% decrease in VF inducibility with procainamide and elimination of VF with propafenone. Despite this protection from VF, monomorphic VT was induced with propafenone in 57% of burst stimulations. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-induced PRR protects against VF induction. Propafenone promotes slow monomorphic VT, probably by use-dependent conduction slowing and wavelength shortening.

Myocardial vulnerability to T wave shocks: relation to shock strength, shock coupling interval, and dispersion of ventricular repolarization.

INTRODUCTION: Induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) by T wave shocks is of clinical interest due to the correlation between the upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) and the defibrillation threshold (DFT). However, the ULV has not yet been defined precisely in reference to the entire "area of vulnerability" (AOV), which is defined bifunctionally by both shock strengths and shock coupling intervals, nor has it been related to the dispersion of ventricular repolarization, considered to be an important determinant of vulnerability. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 11 isolated perfused rabbit hearts immersed in a tissue bath containing a 3-lead ECG recording system and two opposite plate electrodes for field shock administration, 7 monophasic action potentials (MAPs) were recorded simultaneously from different epicardial and endocardial regions of the right and left ventricles. An average of 90 +/- 25 monophasic waveform shocks of varying shock strengths and coupling intervals were delivered to each heart to determine the horizontal and vertical boundaries of the AOV. The AOV approximated a rhomboid with homogenous VF inducibility. The ULV and lower limit of vulnerability (LLV) represented discrete corners of the AOV with significant changes in VF inducibility if either shock coupling intervals or shock strength were changed by only 10 msec or 10 V, respectively (P < 0.001). The ULV occurred at 7 +/- 10 msec shorter coupling intervals than the LLV (P < 0.05), and VF-inducing shock strengths at the left corner of the AOV were 50 +/- 67 V higher as compared to the right corner (P < 0.01). The maximal range of VF-inducing coupling intervals coincided (within < 2 msec) with the dispersion of MAPs at 70% repolarization, and the ULV coupling interval coincided (within < 4 msec) with the longest repolarization at 50%. CONCLUSIONS: (1) VF vulnerability to monophasic T wave shocks is defined by an AOV that has the shape of a leftward tilted rhomboid. (2) Both the ULV and LLV are sharply defined upper and lower corners of the AOV rhomboid. (3) The width of the AOV corresponds to the dispersion of ventricular repolarization at the 70% level. (4) Considering the dispersion of ventricular repolarization may yield more precise ULV determinations and a better understanding of the correlation between the ULV and DFT.

Shock-induced dispersion of ventricular repolarization: implications for the induction of ventricular fibrillation and the upper limit of vulnerability.

INTRODUCTION: Shock-induced dispersion of ventricular repolarization (SIDR) caused by an electrical field stimulus has been suggested as a mechanism of ventricular fibrillation (VF) induction; however, this hypothesis has not been studied systematically in the intact heart. Likewise, the mechanism underlying the upper (ULV) and lower (LLV) limit of vulnerability remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: In eight Langendorff-perfused rabbit hearts, monophasic action potentials were recorded simultaneously from ten different sites of both ventricles. Truncated biphasic T wave shocks were randomly delivered at various coupling intervals and strengths, exceeding the vulnerable window, ULV, and LLV, SIDR, defined as the difference between the longest and shortest postshock repolarization times, was 64 +/- 15 msec for shocks inducing VF. SIDR was 41 +/- 17 msec for shocks delivered above the ULV, and 33 +/- 14 and 27 +/- 8 msec for shocks delivered 10 msec before and after the vulnerable window, respectively (all P < 0.01 vs VF-inducing shocks). Although SIDR was larger for shocks delivered below the LLV (93 +/- 24 msec, P < 0.01 vs VF-inducing shocks), the repolarization extension was significantly smaller for shocks below the LLV (10.3% +/- 3.9% vs 16.3% +/- 4.9%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SIDR is influenced by the shock timing and intensity. Large SIDR within the vulnerable window and an SIDR decrease toward its borders suggest that SIDR is essential for VF induction. The decrease in SIDR toward greater shock strengths may explain the ULV. Small repolarization extension for shocks below the LLV may explain why these shocks, despite producing large SIDR, fail to induce VF.

Induction of ventricular fibrillation by T-wave field-shocks in the isolated perfused rabbit heart: role of nonuniform shock responses.

OBJECTIVES: Single electrical field shocks are able to induce ventricular fibrillation (VF) if applied during the vulnerable period. During this period, a shock can either prolong the action potential duration or induce a new action potential. Whether the occurrence of different shock responses contributes to the induction of VF has not been investigated directly in the intact heart. METHODS: In 12 isolated Langendorff-perfused rabbit hearts seven monophasic action potentials (MAPs) were recorded simultaneously during the application of 838 T-wave shocks. Post-shock repolarization was assessed by classifying the shock-induced response in each MAP recording either as a full action potential or an action potential prolongation. Heterogeneity of post-shock repolarization was defined if both response patterns were present in different MAP recordings at the same time. The heterogeneity of post-shock activation was measured as the dispersion of the post-shock activation time (PS-AT). The arrhythmogeneity of a shock was quantified as the number of rapid shock-induced repetitive responses. RESULTS: Shocks inducing nonuniform repolarization were associated with greater arrhythmogeneity than shocks inducing uniform repolarization (17.6 +/- 30.0 versus 1.6 +/- 1.1 shock-induced repetitive responses, p < 0.001). The severity of the induced arrhythmia increased gradually with increasing nonuniformity of repolarization (p < 0.01 for a 10% increase), being maximal when the shock initiated near equal numbers of both full action potentials and action potential prolongations. The induction of severe arrhythmias by T-wave shocks was also associated with a higher dispersion of PS-AT (29 +/- 14 ms for the induction of VF, 19 +/- 12 ms for non-sustained arrhythmia, and 12 +/- 8 ms for no arrhythmic response, all p < 0.001). For VF inducing shocks, an increase in shock strength towards the upper limit of vulnerability decreased the dispersion of PS-AT from 34 +/- 15 ms to 23 +/- 11 ms (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nonuniform post-shock repolarization and dispersed post-shock activation contribute to the induction of VF by T-wave shocks. A decreasing dispersion of PS-AT towards higher shock strengths may contribute to the decreased or abolished inducibility by shocks above the upper limit of vulnerability.

Computer analysis of monophasic action potentials: manual validation and clinically pertinent applications.

Monophasic action potential (MAP) recordings are increasingly being used in a variety of clinical and experimental situations but their manual measurement is cumbersome, especially when hundreds or thousands of beats must be analyzed to monitor the exact time course of action potential duration (APD) changes following heart rate alterations, during surveillance of APD alternans, or during the onset and stabilization of Class III drug effects. To facilitate this task we developed a computer program that automates programmed electrical stimulation, digitizes at 1-kHz sampling frequency MAP recordings up to 8 channels simultaneously, analyzes all APDs at repolarization levels from 10%-90% in 10% decrements (APD10-90), and automatically outputs the analyzed numerical data into spreadsheets for graphical display or statistical analysis. To validate the computer algorithm, two independent observers manually analyzed 585 concurrent MAP recordings at a paper speed of 100 mm/s. Cycle length measurements by the computer were precise to 0.4 +/- 0.5 ms as compared to the computer determined paced cycle length. Computer measurements of APD20, 50, and 90 differed from manual measurements by 2.0 +/- 8.8 ms, 0.7 +/- 7.9 ms, and 0.2 +/- 8.5 ms, respectively, for observer 1; and by 12.2 +/- 8.3 ms, 5.8 +/- 7.5 ms, and 1.4 +/- 10.1 ms, respectively, for observer 2. Inter-observer variability (IOV) was 10.3 +/- 11.1 (APD20), 5.1 +/- 9.0 ms (APD50), and 1.2 +/- 7.8 ms (APD90), which was similar to computer/observer-2 differences and significantly greater (0.001) than computer/observer-1 differences. This indicates that the computer analysis was at least as precise as manual measurements when compared to IOV, and more precise when comparing computer/observer-1 differences to IOV. While providing equal or greater precision, computer-aided analysis of 100 MAP signals took approximately 1 minute while manual analysis of the same data set took between 2.5 and 4 hours. The pacing and analysis software was subsequently applied to experiments that mimic clinically pertinent examples of MAP recordings: (1) automatic generation, analysis, and graphical display of electrical restitution curves at multiple ventricular sites simultaneously; (2) evaluation of myocardial pharmacokinetics by monitoring the progression of Class III antiarrhythmic drug effects by continuous MAP recordings, and displaying differences in drug action between multiple sites; (3) depiction of the adaptation time course of APD to abrupt changes in paced cycle length; and (4) quantitative analysis of APD alternans during myocardial ischemia. The results show that our computerized algorithm greatly facilitates the generation of cardiac electrophysiological, and clinically important, data.